Frontier Feminism

The Spearhead ^ | May 21, 2010 | Hawaiian Libertarian

[Christian Cage]

Conservative female columnists have gone gaga over Sarah Palin. She’s a “conservative” feminist…aka a “pro-life feminist” that still believes women were oppressed by men, didn’t have “equal rights” and that suffrage and the social engineering that has propelled women en masse into what was once the male sphere of gender roles are all still “good” things.

Left wing, or right wing, “feminism” is still an ideology of female pedestalization…female superiority. It promotes the same myths of female “Strength and independence.”

One “conservative feminist,” Townhall columnist Maggie Gallagher, wrote about a recent Palin speech she attended, in a column entitled Sarah Palin’s Girl Power:

Palin understands that she is building not just a new political movement, but a new cultural identity. She dubbed it “frontier feminism,” and it was the theme she carried through from beginning to end.

Well isn’t that special. Palin is not just a feminist…she’s a FRONTIER FEMINIST.

She speaks emotionally as a mother, from the heart of motherhood, and she makes it what it should be: a source of power, not an admission of weakness or dependency, and a bond, the deepest bond among women.

See…”conservative” women are no different. The appeal of herd bonding through the sharing of emotional experience is a “source of power.” Note how dependency is associated with weakness.

This association is precisely how the feminists appealed to the solipsism of the female mind to get them to embrace the ideological platform to destroy the dynamics of the Patriarchal nuclear family.

[Anti-Utopian]

There were four to five Englishmen for every woman during the colonization period, and the ratio gradually grew as the Western Frontier expanded. The greatest difference being Alaska’s peak ratio of 100 frontiersmen for every woman.

[Nepeta]

Those voices you hear telling you women are inferior are coming from the base of Feminism:

Uh, no, they're not. I'm old enough to have been told in college that there was no reason for me to study physics because I was just going to get married. I'm old enough to have looked for a job under "Jobs, Male" because that's where the technical/scientific jobs were listed. I'm old enough to have been told [at Procter & Gamble] that young, single males deserved raises because someday they would be supporting a family, and that single females did not because someday men would be supporting them. None of this has anything to do with Trotsky or shrieking feminists, and everything to do with unfairness that was legal at the time. I don't want to go back to having to explain to potential employers why I wanted a job even though I was married. I know people who believed all of the above was just and fair are still around, and still believe there is nothing wrong with their beliefs.

This isn't about Trotsky. Or Alinsky. Or any of the howling feminists. Some women deserve no respect. But some of us DO, and are as thoughtful as any conservative male, and NO LESS dedicated to conservative principles.

[donna]

So, women get equal pay today, woopee. However, our country is going bankrupt paying for the social services Feminists demand to take care of their children in place of a husband.

Feminists’ neglected children are sex starved socialists who vote for Obama.

Just what Trotsky and Marx predicted.

[SoConPubbie]

So, women get equal pay today, woopee. However, our country is going bankrupt paying for the social services Feminists demand to take care of their children in place of a husband.

Feminists’ neglected children are sex starved socialists who vote for Obama.

Just what Trotsky and Marx predicted.

You nailed it.

[Nepeta]

So, women get equal pay today, woopee. However, our country is going bankrupt paying for the social services Feminists demand to take care of their children in place of a husband.

So paying a woman at a lesser rate of pay for the same job means that the welfare state will go away? Are you aware that companies once had formal policies, publicly acknowledged, of two pay scales for the same jobs? Would you like your daughter to get paid that way? Your mother?

Feminists’ neglected children are sex starved socialists who vote for Obama.

Liberals fantasize about people who make comments like this.

[Smokin' Joe]

While certainly, not all unmarried women are depending on Government for a handout, the proportion of people who do depend on government for a handout is composed largely of unmarried women. Why? Because unmarried women can more easily qualify for aid than unmarried men. Social biases contend that women are natrually better parents than men, thus have custody of the dependent children which allows them access to federal programs at a ratr greater than that of married women.

I do not think the 'solution' is to ban anyone from voting based on melanin or their chromosones, but the thought that much of the culturally destructive self interest displayed at the polls might be circumvented by recalling at one time the criteria for voting included the words "...and a property owner". That status was generally held by those who were responsible, had some business or other acumen which would give them the means to preserve that.

I think some of the points being awkwardly made here decry the false feminism which claims independence, but which actually replaces the patriarchical family with one which has the State as its de facto head, not those women (and I have had the priveledge of knowing a few) who can pull their own weight and should be compensated in the workplace for what they do, married or not.

I have found that universally the latter are conservative in their outlook and politics, and a joy to know.

[Nepeta]

I wouldn't have a problem with voting limited to property owners, or perhaps to property owners and veterans of the military.

Unmarried women without children are in the same position as unmarried men in most cases in terms of assistance, public or private.

[Smokin' Joe]

I'd add in Military service (present or honorable discharge), too.

Unmarried women without children are in the same position as unmarried men in most cases in terms of assistance, public or private.

I only knew one single dad who applied for assistance (bad year for the local economy) and he had a heck of a fight to get so much as food stamps.

Most of the aid programs are oriented toward single mothers, but when the State steps in as 'daddy' (or at least in the traditional role of provider), few women who enter the programs seem to get out, at least while their children can be listed as dependents.

[jla]

True feminism, personified -

[heye2monn]

Thanks for article! It is a sad tale, both for the women voters who feel so dependent on big government, and the feckless men who fail to support them when they need it most.

[donna]

Liberals fantasize about people who make comments like this.

How do you know?

[aruanan]

So paying a woman at a lesser rate of pay for the same job means that the welfare state will go away? Are you aware that companies once had formal policies, publicly acknowledged, of two pay scales for the same jobs?

Back in the earlier part of the 20th century and before when men were usually the sole support of a family, certain companies said they would pay more for a man than a woman and more for a married man with a family than for a single man. The rationale was that it wasn't fair to make it possible for a family to have two full incomes when there were unemployed men who were trying to support their families on a single income and that a single man needed less income than a married man (typical social engineering mindset).

[donna]

The point is that Feminism is socialism by another name.

[Nepeta]

Liberals fantasize about people who make comments like this.

How do you know?

Because I read the outrageous way they characterize conservatives as uneducated, stupid, unthinking primitives who want to impose some sort of faith-based patriarchy on everyone. [The irony, of course, is that they are describing Islam so well.] Knowing what your opposition says about you is useful.

[Nepeta]

The point is that Feminism is socialism by another name.

I guess Margaret Thatcher is a socialist.

Simple mantras do not fit all circumstances.

[FreeReign]

So, women get equal pay today, woopee. However, our country is going bankrupt paying for the social services Feminists demand to take care of their children in place of a husband.

Social services replacing husbands? What on earth does this have to do with Palin?

[donna]

Palin’s first big spending program for the federal government was based on her own family’s problems. That’s a hint of the future for sure:

Oct. 24, 2008:
In her first policy address since joining the Republican ticket, Sarah Palin called for parents of special needs children to use federal funding to pick the school of their choice...

Palin also called for full federal funding of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, phasing in an additional $15 billion in funding over five years.

As opposed to President Reagan:
During the 1980 presidential campaign, Ronald Reagan dubbed the fledgling Department of Education “President Carter’s new bureaucratic boondoggle.”

[donna]

“I owe nothing to Women’s Lib.”
- Margaret Thatcher

[Nepeta]

“I owe nothing to Women’s Lib.” - Margaret Thatcher

Margaret Thatcher never would have happened in a society in which women could not serve in government. What is your point? That women should be stripped of voting rights, and banned from public life?

I have no use for airhead victim liberal women with their hands out demanding that their lives be handed to them, but usually the only women who want other women reduced to second class people are the ones who had their lives handed to them by someone else, and who never attempted or who failed to become adult people capable of taking care of themselves.

I don't feel threatened by women like Palin or Bachmann, and I don't think woman AND men who are secure in their sense of who they are and what they believe are not threatened by them, either. They are not about men versus women; they are about the core values and beliefs of this country versus a decadent plague of destructive, malevolent collectivism.

[donna]

I have no respect for what you’re talking about.

Feminism destroys families so that socialism can take over. The proof is all around us.

Conservatives believe in God, family and country in that order.